The Bitter Irony of Hiring SEOs via Google…

INTRO: This post had been in SEOno‘s Drafts for over six months, and I never thought that I’d ever publish it. However, following Doc’s open letter post, and particularly this comment – “I’m not whining about my lost organic traffic. I’m fortunate, in that the vast majority of my business comes from client referrals. I don’t need Google, in that regard.” – I thought that I’d post it on here instead.

Bitter Lemons photoIn recent months, I’ve had my SEO skills questioned by other SEOs on two occasions.

The first time was a few months ago, regarding a blog post I’d written for Box UK (my previous employer). Some arsehole lovely individual left an anonymous comment saying that I “should be sacked” from my SEO role at the company because the post’s title and meta description weren’t optimised. Granted, I didn’t write the post to rank for anything (more on that later), but I’m wondering if this person’s opinion on optimisation was the old school “keyword1, keyword2, keyword3, adnauseum” approach, because, y’know, that’s how you SEO things!* But well, yeah, y’know that’s just like your opinion, man.

* Eagle-eyed readers will spot that that sentence was (mostly) sarcasm…

The second time was a few days ago, regarding my new website’s copy. Someone I know told me that while there were instances of some of the keywords in the titles, meta descriptions, body copy, etc., they felt that it may not be enough to rank.

So it’s inspired me to say something that I’ve wanted to say for ages, that I’m sure will rock the boat (or should that be ‘shift the rankings’) of a few people in our industry. Continue reading “The Bitter Irony of Hiring SEOs via Google…”

The Case For Continually Updated Content – Revisited

continuously updated contentSometimes, you write about something and think to yourself: “holy crap, this is going to be BIG in the next year or so!”

…But then it turns out that you’re wrong.

Huh. Fair enough – it happens, I mean we can’t always be right with our predictions, eh? – but sometimes it feels almost undeservedly so…

Over a year ago, I wrote a YouMoz post called “Continually Updated Content & Extended Outreach – A Case Study,” which discussed how an evergreen – but regularly updated – piece of content can obtain more links over time and can be shared multiple times via social media more legitimately compared to most other standard content. The difference is that while regular evergreen content is always relevant (hence, why it’s evergreen), once it’s published, it never typically changes, while continually updated content is constantly being changed and added to by the author/creator. Continue reading “The Case For Continually Updated Content – Revisited”